Vikrant kumar @ Bikrant Kumar v. The State of Bihar
CR. MISC./28174/2026 · 2026-05-04
Ashok Kumar Pandey
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 15517 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 15517 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28174 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-23 Year-2026 Thana- NAKARDEI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Vikrant kumar @ Bikrant Kumar Son of Ramekbal Sah @ Rambali Sah Resident of village -srisiya mal, Ps- Nakardeyee, Dist- East champaran ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 2 04-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Nakardei P.S. Case No. 23 of 2026, N.D.P.S. G.R. Case No. 75 of 2026 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c), 21(b) and 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that altogether 55.11 grams of smack and Rs. 20,200 of Nepalese currency were recovered from the possession of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The witnesses of the seizure list are
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28174 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026 2/2 police personnel and the police has not complied with Section 105 of the BNSS while making the seizure. He further submits that the alleged recovery of contraband is though more than small quantity but is much less than commercial quantity. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since
24.02.2026.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submits that the petitioner has criminal antecedent of one case.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge/Special Judge, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Nakardei P.S. Case No. 23 of 2026, N.D.P.S. G.R. Case No. 75 of 2026.
Sudhanshu/- (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) U T